Incorporating behavioral theory in OM empirical models

In the 1980 inaugural issue of the Journal of Operations Management, Powell and Johnson (1980) stressed the need to introduce behavioral factors into research models of operational processes and performance. More recently, Hopp's (2004) article on the 50th anniversary of Management Science has issued a similar call, emphasizing that understanding the nature of a firm's operations “does not just require a theory of human motivation and a theory of material flow; it also requires a means for describing the interaction between the two.” In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the introduction of behavioral theory as a key element of empirical models of operational dynamics and performance. The implications suspected through the joint consideration of such theories lay not only in the evaluation of new models designed to capture a changing global economy, but also in reassessing the validity of existing models that have come to be recognized as foundations and sources of fundamental assumptions in operations management. While academic research on operations topics has long accepted the role of human factors in ensuring the effectiveness of prescribed operational policy, the field has had a tendency to defer these issues to other disciplines, focusing instead on ones that might at first appear simpler to codify and objectively address. Sadly, this has resulted in a natural discounting of the intimacy of operational and human-behavioral dynamics, and a natural barrier to the practicality of much research in operations. Fortunately, there has been a recent resurgence in the interest of incorporating these “softer” issues in OM, as demonstrated by events such as the 2006–2007 Harvard series on Behavioral Operations, the 2006 Penn State conference on Behavioral Research in OM, the expansion of the Behavioral Dynamics in OM network of scholars (along with its affiliated conference arms), and moves by other journals to recognize the relevance of human behavior in operational policy. Since these events took place largely following the placement of this special issue call, we must thank Rob Handfield for having the foresight to sponsor this special issue. Its timeliness is only reinforced by this wave of new activity. In total, 49 papers were submitted for review to this special issue. The decision, to reject specific papers at the desk level or pass them on to full review, was based largely on a clear and meaningful reliance on existing behavioral theory in revealing insights into operations practice. Furthermore, as required by the call, all papers undergoing full review had to demonstrate an empirical orientation. Along with the special issue submissions, an additional two manuscripts under later stages of general review at JOM were transferred into this special issue on the basis of fit, and an additional review article was developed by the special issue editors to emphasize the critical role of behavioral laboratory research in clarifying fundamental assumptions, often taken for granted by operations modelers. As always, the rigor and quality of the review process is largely the artifact of reviewers. In each case of full review, we made efforts to assign reviewers knowledgeable of the context being studied, as well as the theory and methodology applied. In each of these cases, we also ensured that at least one reviewer was either from a top 20 business school or a recognized content expert. In each case at least three reviewers were assigned, at least two of which were tenured faculty members. In summary, the seven articles that successfully passed through the review process, therefore, represented a 14% acceptance rate. We believe that a number of ideas presented by papers rejected in this process hold a great deal of merit if pursued, and strongly encourage authors to continue their work along related lines. The final set published in this special issue are highly characteristic of the breadth of topics covered by the original 49, and to that extent provide a rich and broad ground for future research at the interface of OM and OB/HR research.